I’m not arguing it theoretically might not have been better if there had been a universal government backed insurance program in the US. I am explaining why right now it is hard to get to such a program, especially when it entails eliminating all private insurance. The US is a country in which over two thirds of the people have either employer-provided private health care insurance or government-provided Medicare insurance for the elderly giving the vast majority access to excellent healthcare as good or better than what you have in terms of access to specialists, advanced technology, and surgical facilities. The US does have a problem: there are 20-30 million uninsured. Yes maybe the US should have built a house with a different floorplan, but MFA is a proposal to tear the house apart in order to fix up a room. It does take private coverage away from 250 million people. It does give them a huge tax increase, a real tax bill they have to psy. . It promises that people will eventually be better off on a net basis. Maybe, but it’s a hard sell. “ Medicare for All Who Want It” is far less disruptive and does not take coverage away from people. In any event, I hope that provides some explanation for why many people in the US are not all in for MFA. They like it when they first hear about it, but grow less positive when they learn they will lose their existing coverage, and become decidedly negative when they learn they will have to pay a hefty new tax.